Ray wrote:

Hi Elizabeth,

 

Thanks for your note.

 

Please see my responses below.

 

Ray

 

In a message dated 8/22/2007 6:17:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Elizabeth  writes:

Hello Ray,
Some members of our little Friday gatherings have expressed some
concerns to me over some of the incidents that have taken place during
our vigils between you and some hostile people who drive by and yell at
us,

People have such concerns everywhere I go.

so I thought I would just let you know that there are concerns and
ask if we can find a way to minimize the hostilities. 

No way. As long as we have morons and assholes expressing themselves freely in support of the current administration, I'd prefer to see more confrontation, not less.

I don't want to
be critical of you or anyone else who is generous enough with their time
to support the vigil, but I also don't want others to be chased away
from participating because they are not comfortable.  

No biggie. I'll just stop coming.

And I admit to
some discomfort over it myself as well I suppose. 

I suspected as much.

I didn't want the
vigil to become too political,

No wonder I'm not fitting in.

I just wanted it to be about peace and
anti-torture. 

I get the peace part, but I don't recall seeing anyone else taking on torture.

So, even though I, personally, TOTALLY, 1000% agree with
the impeachment message, I think that is for a different vigil

OK

~ it
seems a little over-the-top for a peace vigil because it gets into
partisan politics ~ or at least some people are bound to view it that
way. 

Actually, it has become non-partisan politics, as none of the partisans appear to have the stomach for impeachment. (Only Ramsey Clark and the Minneapolis City Council have actually published articles.)

That is why I like the "support our troops, bring them home"
message, because it counter-acts some people's assumption that you can't
be for the troops and against the war at the same time

Frankly, I find that whole approach a republican-driven cop-out and a way of making it OK for us to send money and munitions to our troops so they can make stupid mistakes, create unspeakable nightmare scenarios, and commit hideous atrocities. I support all humanity's right to freedom and happiness, but I oppose all hostile military aggression.

~ it is not
partisan and can't be construed that way. 

Agreed. The democrats no longer care to be seen in public standing for anything. See comment on impeachment.

I just think that it takes
the vigil someplace else if we attack people, especially across party
lines, rather than over ideas. 

No doubt my willingness to engage confrontational people creates a different space, but I am also always willing to engage on ideas. Sometimes confrontation creates that sort of opening, too. Possibly more so than the alternative.

Attacking the ideas (war/torture)
generated by the people (Bush and Co.) is a stronger position because it
can unite people that might otherwise not be able to agree ~ like, I
think it is hard for some Republicans to admit they were wrong or that
"their" president lied, made some mistakes, or simply is an idiot ~ but
many of them will join acknowledging the stupidity of the policies if we
don't attack the actual person. 

I disagree. Attacking the ideas without addressing (impeaching) the source is just putting a band aid on a cancer.

We want to encourage people to join our
message.  The more positive that message can be, the better. 

Sadly, I think the approach you suggest is doomed to utter failure. People need rallying points and ways to feel effective. Our little vigils don't do that. With the way things are now, we run the risk of becoming pathetic anachronisms.

We need to
focus our (justifiable) negative energy on the actual policies, however
tempting it may be to vent our (justifiable) rage on those that
implemented the policies. 

In another time or another place, you might be right, but I don't see any "up" side to making nice in this time and in this place. Anyone who hasn't woken up by now is not going to wake up in response to quiet murmerings.

I hope I am making sense. 

You are, in a mid-west, sensible, sad kind of way.

I hope you won't
be offended or upset with me, or that we can talk about it if there is
something you don't agree with or are not comfortable with

I am a little offended, but only a little, and not at all upset with you. I don't think we should talk, however, unless you are open to a more emphatic activism. I'm not interested in the ideas you've shared in this note.

~ I want us
all to get along and feel good about participating in the vigil. 

Not me. I want us to be challenged and upset and feel nervous about political action and about living in this nightmare land. If we get along is should be because we appreciate and support our differences, not in spite of them.

As for
the windbags that drive by and shout unfair things at us, I agree it is
tempting to shout back ~ I would prefer that we just didn't acknowledge
them, but, if you must, just make it short and sweet and don't let it
snarl up traffic. 

For me, it's like tennis. As long as somebody lobs something at me, I'm there to share.

If you really must have a conversation with someone
about it, please ask them to pull into a parking place in order to talk
about it, preferably without yelling. 

I've actually had several of those conversations over the last couple of years, but they are rare.

That may be just enough reason to
scare the real idiots away ~ anyone who is willing to pull into a
parking spot and talk rather than taking pot-shots on the fly may
actually turn out to be a decent person who can reasoned with. 

Surprisingly, there are plenty of pig-headed reasonable people. I know dozens of them. (I'm one too!)

Anyone
else isn't, and it just hurts our vigil to escalate the rage.  We can't
hope to instantly convert someone who is dead set against us and full of
rage, especially by out-yelling them. 

When did I say I was trying to convert anyone? I gave that up two elections ago. I'm just out there to be a witness to the truth, as I see it, and ignorance, as others display it. If someone wants to challenge me, they'd better be ready to be insulted and belittled.

If they are yelling, they aren't
listening, unfortunately, so then it is just a contest of the wills, not
an actual dialog. 

There's more going on there than meets the eye, but on the most superficial level, you are correct. I will them to discuss their stupid ideas. Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't, but its not for lack of trying on my part.

Ultimately what this is about, I suppose, is that as
peace advocates we must set a good example by resisting the urge to
fight those that would fight with us. 

Yes, you peace advocates should stick with that. It seems to me that street-level justice advocates (such as Ghandi and King) are into the peaceful resistance part when there are enough people engaged to generate a potentially violent confrontation with an oppressive regime. We are a long way from that.

If we don't give them permission,
they can't fight with us. 

Agreed. If we don't give them permission, they won't wake up, either.

I know it is hard because every time someone
drives by and yells something hurtful, unfair, ignorant, or cruel, my
insides boil.  I am blessed with a slow reaction time, so they are
usually gone by the time I figure out my response.  The few times I have
tried to talk to them, I have regretted it because they only slap back
harder. 

Sorry to hear it didn't work out better for you.

I always have to cool off after something like that happens. 

Me too.

I
know what I am asking is hard to do.  I certainly respect the legitimacy
of your reactions. 

Thanks.

I just want the peace vigil to be peaceful. 

Hey, it's your vigil.

Your
dedication to the cause is very appreciated, your participation much
valued.  Thanks for attending so regularly. 

You are entirely welcome.

I hope to see you Friday.

No, I'll not be coming any more.

Oh, rats, I forgot, I have a wedding up in Glendale this Friday and will
be absent.  Well, the next Friday then!

Have a great wedding!

Peace,
Elizabeth

 

Remember, if you want peace, work for justice.

Ray

 

p.s. to Atia - just fyi. See you around.

 

FOLLOW-UP

 

In a message dated 8/23/2007 1:52:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Elizabeth writes:

Thanks, Ray, for your detailed reply.  Your thoughts certainly do give me a lot to ponder.  I found myself agreeing with most of what you say.  Now I have to figure out how to reconcile the difference between what i agree with in what you say and what I already said.  Part of that is because I felt a little caught in the middle, trying to appease some vigilantes, but even as I wrote the note to you (more-or-less prompted by that) I realized that I wasn't entirely sure where I stood regarding these questions.  I need to know that.  If I didn't have to worry about anyone else's feelings, I am not sure where I would stand.  I know I would not have written to you about it or tried to change anything.  I would have waited and watched and let things take their course, let the situation create its own environment.  That is what I do in my life in general.  But the fact remains that some were bothered and I did what I thought was appropriate.  I am disappointed to lose you.
Elizabeth
 

FINALE

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray
To: Elizabeth
Sent: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 8:16 am
Subject: Re: peace vigil

 

I agree you did what was appropriate. Without open and free communication, we have nothing.

 

Don't be disappointed. I'm not. Be glad you had me as long as you did. I am.

 

Ray